Laserfiche WebLink
STATEMENT OF ISSUES' <br />I. MAY THE COURT CONSIDER EVIDENCE NOT BEFORE THE <br />BOARD AT THE TIME IT MADE ITS DECISION? <br />II. WAS THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF PR -6 A PROPER RESPONSE TO <br />THE PRE -2008 TOPSOIL MANAGEMENT OF WESTERN FUELS - <br />COLORADO? <br />III. WAS THERE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD <br />SUPPORTING THE BOARD'S CONCLUSION THAT RECLAMATION <br />CALLED FOR IN THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE BOARD WILL MEET <br />STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS? <br />STATEMENT OF THE CASE <br />This case is an administrative appeal of the approval, by the Mined Land <br />Reclamation Board ( "MLRB" or "Board "), of a revision to coal mine Permit No. <br />C- 1981 -008, held by Western Fuels - Colorado for its New Horizon Mine in Nucla. <br />MLRB acted pursuant to the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, <br />C.R.S. § 34 -33 -101, et seq. (the "Act "). The Act, together with the implementing <br />rules found at 2 CCR 407 -2 are known as the "Colorado Coal Program." <br />The permit revision, called "PR -6" in the Record, addresses changes in soil <br />handling practices and reclamation standards necessitated by a 2008 discovery that <br />the soils in certain parts of the mine permit area should have been designated <br />' Although the Colorado Appellate Rules do not strictly apply, Western Fuels Colorado has <br />followed them. This brief complies with CAR 28(g) because it is a principal brief and less than <br />9,500 words long (it has 7,907 words). It contains a concise statement of the appellate standard <br />of review with citation to authority, and provides specific references to the record and not merely <br />references to entire documents. CAR 28(k). <br />(00145923 2 } 1 <br />